My patients knew what I was doing ...
Breast surgeon denies unnecessary operations
A SURGEON accused of performing needless breast operations and mutilating his patients said he acted with their ‘ full consent’, a court heard yesterday.
Taking to the witness stand in his trial – in which he is accused of 20 counts of wounding patients – ian Paterson said there were ‘shades of grey’ in any treatment, adding that suggestions he carried out unnecessary operations for financial gain were ‘abhorrent’.
Paterson, 59, is said to have exaggerated or simply invented the risk of cancer and – in some cases – claimed payments for more expensive procedures between 1997 and 2011, Nottingham Crown Court heard.
His alleged victims include a mother said to have agreed to two ‘unnecessary operations’, leaving her unable to breast feed, and a woman who had a ‘significant deformity in her visible cleavage area’ after unneeded operations on her left breast.
Jurors heard Paterson speak of his innocence at a police interview relating to the allegations on January 8, 2013. Prosecutor Nicholas Barraclough said in a statement: ‘He has never pressured any patient to undergo surgery. He gave patients time to make their decision.
‘All surgical procedures taken by him were appropriate and necessary and he denies any allegations of unnecessary surgery or bad faith.’
Paterson was yesterday quizzed about the case of GP Rosemary Platt, who had a mastectomy. The prosecution claimed this procedure was unjustified as there was no evidence of abnormal cells in the milk glands, but this was denied by the surgeon.
The father of three said the fact Dr Platt was medically qualified had a ‘massive’ effect on how he treated her.
He said: ‘it’s impossible to treat a doctor colleague the same as another lady of the same age and intelligence or whatever. She brings to the table medical knowledge and, with that medical knowledge, preconceptions – some of which are wrong – and these preconceptions may actually be throwbacks to what she learnt at medical school. it can be a challenge to treat a colleague.’
The defence QC asked: ‘Did you believe what you did was justified?’ Paterson replied: ‘Yes, with her full consent.’
He added: ‘i would always use an analogy that i thought people would understand – i used shades of grey. For me, white was benign, nothing to worry about, and black was cancer. And between these two extremes are shades of grey. everyone can understand that.’
Paterson accused the prosecution team’s medical experts of simplifying cancer diagnoses, saying: ‘The prosecution experts have put [abnormal cells] as benign. They are not. There are shades of grey.’
Paterson, of Altrincham, near Manchester, denies the charges. The trial continues.